I don't have that spec in front of me, but if it is used directly, that would
reveal personally identifiable information. I would hope it is used as input
into a hash out something.
The solution spec we're developing would certainly not use such a value
directly or allow it to be derived.
Got it. Thanks! I'll make that change.
Paul
-Original Message-
From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:acoo...@cdt.org]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 9:45 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: ietf@ietf.org; apps-disc...@ietf.org; webfin...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Last Call: draft-ietf
Alissa,
It was suggested that we remove the word implicit. I'm OK with removing
it. If we did that, would you want to add this new sentence or a modified
version of it?
Paul
-Original Message-
From: apps-discuss-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:apps-discuss-
boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Hannes,
I was hoping that some of the remarks that I provided last year (e.g.,
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth/current/msg08965.html) would
help to clarify the content of the document. That didn't quite happen...
Yeah, I wasn't copied.
In earlier versions of the document I had
Dale,
Personally, I'd trust date -u much sooner than any random person.
Even better:
$ date --date='00:00 Feb 26, 2013 UTC'
Mon Feb 25 19:00:00 EST 2013
$
Funny thing is when I try the date from the announcement:
All Final Version (-01 and up) submissions are due by UTC
Joes,
Then again, having these deadlines at all is a bit silly.
It just forces authors to informally distribute updates directly on
the list, and cuts off access to work that doesn't need to happen in
sync with an IETF meeting.
I agree with your point to a large extent, but I'm sure there
But it does clue one in immediately to the fact that the parameter is
non-standard.
Paul
-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Mark Nottingham
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 11:11 PM
To: Randy Bush
Cc: Randall Gellens;
will remain.
One way to help this is to get standards through the IETF faster. Some take
forever.
Paul
-Original Message-
From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:m...@mnot.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 12:57 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: 'Randy Bush'; 'Randall Gellens'; ietf@ietf.org
Subject
Mark,
Generally, it's hard for me to be enthusiastic about this proposal, for
a few reasons. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be published, but I do
question the need for it to be Standards Track as a general mechanism.
I believe standards track is appropriate, since the objective is to define
Frank,
No, it does not. It's simply an alternative representation of the fax data.
The receiver could receive it and print it, create audio tones (if it
desired), produce a TIFF image and e-mail it, or whatever else it wished to
do.
Paul
-Original Message-
From: Frank Ellermann
and coordinate between multiple
standards organizations.
Paul
From: Eliot Lear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 1:56
AM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Brian E
Carpenter'; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: RFC 4612 - historic
status
Paul E. Jones wrote:
I
: Paul E. Jones; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: RFC 4612 - historic status
--On Monday, 14 August, 2006 08:56 +0200 Brian E Carpenter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eliot Lear wrote:
Paul E. Jones wrote:
I wonder how customers might react to seeing new gateway
hardware
Dave,
This is the second document this year that I published through the IETF that
was classified as historic. The was RFC 4351.
In both cases, I was working in the ITU on fax and modems issues and with
people looking for a way to efficiently transport modulated signals between
two PSTN
Dan,
H.323 has not done poorly. In fact, it is the most widely used
standards-based call control protocol. The largest chunk of VoIP traffic
in the world is carried over H.323-based networks. Even now, H.323 is
finding new markets that SIP has only begun to touch. SIP is missing a
number of
A few manufacturers are listed here:
http://www.packetizer.com/sip/sip_links.html
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "Gaurang Kalyanpur" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 11:31 AM
Subject: SIP phones
I am looking for a SIP phone (physical unit) or a
15 matches
Mail list logo
